Last week John Kerry had a compelling op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that examined many of the issues being debated about a potential troop increase in Afghanistan.  Even though I believe that a long term commitment to Afghanistan will help keep America safer, I agree with Kerry that now is the time for a vigorous debate that considers all the options.  When we consider sending our men and women into harms way, it is our duty to ensure that it is done as a last resort.  We must closely examine the other possible courses of action and evaluate their likelihood of success. Now is the time to have that debate.

So far, unlike the health care debate, the discussion about Afghanistan has been relatively civil and has not broken down along partisan lines.  Democrats and Republicans are divided within their own parties as to the appropriate next steps.  If we are to risk more American lives, I’m confident that we can all agree on one paramount goal – keeping Americans safe from attack.  There are different approaches, however, to achieving this goal.

The debate now seems to be coming down to a question of whether or not we should concern ourselves with the Taliban as well as Al Qaeda.  There are credible arguments on either side.  Those who say that we should be focused only on Al Qaeda argue that the Taliban don’t seek to attack the United States.  They pose no imminent threat.  Those on the other side argue that Taliban control of much of Afghanistan provides a safe haven for Al Qaeda.  Using recent history as my guide, I tend to come down on the side of the latter.  After the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, the Taliban seized control of the country and allowed Al Qaeda free reign.  There is a high probability that if the Taliban were able to regain control of the country, they would once again provide sanctuary to Al Qaeda.

Although targeted strikes and drones may be able to take out some of them, more willing recruits will quickly take their place.  Granted, most will be unable to actually harm any Americans.  But a few of them will manage to penetrate our defenses.  All it takes is for one of the successful ones to get his hands on a nuclear device.  This is the nightmare scenario.  Unless a viable alternative is presented to the Afghan population and sufficient security is provided to foster that alternative path, I fear that the scenario I just described will become increasingly likely.

I also recognize that other historical precedents should give us pause – primarily the fact that Afghanistan has stood its ground against so many more powerful military forces.  We must remember that the answers in this conflict are not clear cut and even General McChrystal recognizes that the solution is not just more troops.  He wrote, “Resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it.”  While much of the media focuses on the number of troops that will be requested, it is equally important to analyze the effectiveness of McChrystal’s new strategy.  This strategy emphasizing the protection of Afghan civilians will put more of our troops at risk.  Not only will we have more troops in the country, but more of them will be put in harms way.  Before we do that, we must be sure that the American people understand the gravity of this effort.  We must ensure that all other avenues were fully considered.  We must understand the stakes of the conflict.

Of course, this debate is already playing out in the op-ed pages and amongst the public commentators.  There has been one particular semantic issue that has continued to frustrate me.  Many supporters of increased engagement refer to Afghanistan as “the good war”.  This is in contrast to Iraq, which I assume is the “bad war”.  My believe is that no wars are good.  Some, however, are justified.  War is about killing and maiming.  It’s about death and destruction.  It results from a failure to resolve differences by more humane means.  There is nothing inherently good about those actions.  Sometimes, however, it is necessary.  Let’s not dress it up in vernacular that cloaks its true identity.

Related posts:

1. Rules of Engagement
2. Afghanistan Debate Tonight
3. My Hamid Karzai Daydream
4. Speaking Honestly to the American People about Afghanistan
5. Not time to do Afghanistan on the cheap